About your Search

20130201
20130228
STATION
MSNBCW 10
MSNBC 9
CNN 2
CNNW 2
KPIX (CBS) 1
WJZ (CBS) 1
LANGUAGE
English 33
Search Results 0 to 32 of about 33 (some duplicates have been removed)
senator from a red state, a decorated and wounded combat veteran nominated to lead the pentagon while we are at war. republicans have never before felt the need to filibuster a cabinet member in the history of the country but apparently now this is the time and this is the guy worth waiting 224 years to spring it on. it has never happened before, but why not now? heck. the white house is not pleased. "today's action runs against both the majority will of the senate and our nation's interest. this waste of time is not without consequence. we have 66,000 men and women deployed in afghanistan, and we need our new secretary of defense to be a part of significant decisions about how we bring that war to a responsible end. next week in brussels, the united states will meet with our allies to talk about the transition in afghanistan at the nato defense ministerial, and our next secretary of defense should be there. for the sake of national security, it's time to stop playing politics with our department of defense and to move beyond the distractions and delay. allow this war hero an up or down
's oil flows. lawmakers have until march the 1st to cut $500 billion from the pentagon's budget over the next decade. if they don't automatic cuts kick. in with that dangling overhead the military has had its hands tied they tell us. jennifer pentagon -- griffin is at the pentagon tonight. i know they want more money. >> that's right. it is significant in terms of the message that it sends to iran right now in a very tense time in the middle east. but it is and it is the first concrete sign that the budget uncertainty is going to have a real impact on national security. at a time when tensions are are high with iran over its nuclear program and negotiations might be coming soon, the u.s. had had a policy of having two aircraft carriers over the golf for the past two years. the uss eisenhower will deploy later this month. but it will go alone we're told to replace the uss. according to george little said facing budget uncertainty continuing budget resolution and across the board sequestration cuts made this request to the secretary and he approved. secretary of defense approved to rev
this will mean damaging layoffs of teachersers law enforcement and food safety inspectors and the pentagon will be hit, too. they propose a mix of spending cuts and, yes, more taxes through limiting deductions for the wealthy. i sat down late friday with house democratic leader nancy pelosi and asked her are about the fast approaching deadline. congress woman pa lo pelosi, we back to "fox news sunday." >> welcome to the capitol. >> the white house says sequestration will have a severe effect on many americans. house republicans agree but say the answer is to find other spending cuts, not tax hikes. >> i would think that sequestration is a bad idea all around. this should be something that is out of the question. the fact is we have had plenty of spending cuts. $1.6 trillion in the budget control act. what we need is growth. we he need growth with jobs. and if you have spending cuts education of our children and other investments like the national institutes of health where you are hindering growth you are not delegate t going te deficit. we need more revenue and more cuts. i would like to
to make cuts that are coherent than at the level of the entire pentagon. the more discretion you give the white house, the easier these cuts might go. so senator republicans of that said, we're willing to give you that discretion. house republicans are gearing up to pass legislation along those lines as well. the thing is that senate democrats are not going to go along with it and the president doesn't want to go along with it. if the president has that discretion to see to it those cults don't have such disastrous effects then the president actually owns the cuts that he actually has to make. so partly there's a pass the buck dynamic going on here as well. >> let me jump through this quickly on one quick question. if, in fact, this does not -- the sequester comes through and the economy gets into trouble, next year we go to the midterm votes, do you think voters will look back and say, it was the republicans' fault? or do you think by then it will be the usual equation of, you're the party in charge, democrats, the economy's failing again, it's your fault, you pay? what do you think?
? >> at the pentagon. >> this is the first time hearing of this. when did this happen? did they make this decision on the cruise ship? >> no. no, they didn't. it actually happened in washington. >> really? that's fascinating. >> which is its own permanent port-a-potty. >> okay. mika, for those of us that were just sitting there looking at a cruise ship for 24 hours instead of following the real news, why don't you catch us up with what actually happened yesterday in the news. >> republicans blocked a vote yesterday that would have ended the debate and allowed for a final decision one way or another. democrats fell just shy of the votes needed to advance the process. something president obama chalked up to partisan politics. >> there's nothing in the constitution that says that somebody should get 60 votes. there are only a handful of instances in which there's been any kind of filibuster of anybody for a cabinet position in our history. and what seems to be happening -- and this has been growing over time -- is the republican minority in the senate seem to think that the rule now is that you have
former top pentagon official, and next, how close could that giant asteroid come to earth? just a little over an hour from now? look outside. this is "andrea mitchell reports" on only on msnbc. [ male announcer ] why is kellogg's crunchy nut so delicious? because every flake is double-toasted... splashed with sweet honey... and covered in rich double-roasted peanuts. mmm. [ hero ] yummy. [ male announcer ] kellogg's crunchy nut. it's super delicious! [ male announcer ] kellogg's crunchy nut. ( ♪ ) for those nights when it's more than a bad dream, be ready. for the days when you get a sudden call from the school, be ready. for the times you need to double-check the temperature on the thermometer, be ready. when you have children's motrin on hand, you're ready. for high fever, nothing works faster or lasts longer than children's motrin. be ready with children's motrin. this single scoop of gain gives more freshness than a whole box of this other stuff... and that much freshness is gonna take some getting used to... [ sniffing ] ahh. mmm! [ male announcer ] yep, it's amazing what a single
to take effect. it will impact virtually every major agency in washington. the pentagon could see roughly half of the reductions and that has republicans upset. >> we're going to begin to unravel the finest military in the history of the world at a time when we need it most. >> reporter: mandatory cuts in domestic spending could also hit americans hard. there could be furloughs of food safety employees, leading to a shortage of meat poultry and eggs and pushing up food prices. 50,000 tsa workers could see their hours cut back that would mean longer security lines for air travelers, and more than 350,000 people who need mental health treatment could be denied. hundreds of thousands of government workers from teachers to federal law enforcement agents are likely to be furloughed. many republicans admit the sequester isn't ideal, but they insist cuts have to be made. >> let me be very clear and i say this to the president as i say it to you, these spending cuts are going to go through on march 1st. >> reporter: the white house warns the cuts would get phased in just a
a classified war using the joint special operations command. it was not coordinated through the pentagon, not through the c.i.a. they essentially went out there, these groups of guys went out. there were targeted kills. what they did was they really stirred up a hornet's nest. >>gretchen: part of the problem was was qaddafi was working with the united states at the time of his demise. people didn't like him because he was a ruthless dictator. but he had turned andg the unit. when he was taken out, the rebel groups coming together were not necessarily all good guys. part of this book is alleging, there was a secret covert mission by the united states hand-picking each these people, and maybe that's why we haven't heard the full story about benghazi. at least that's what this 80-page book is saying. >>brian: can you imagine not telling the c.i.a. director that you're assassinating al qaeda. can you imagine not telling the ambassador. why would he be driving around the country at all basically armed without an armored car and a huge cadre of security officials if he knew that al qaeda was g
. they don't receive combat pay and it's absolutely ridiculous. so recently, the pentagon established that a woman that serves in combat is entitled to receive all of the things that go with it to show our country's appreciation. so it seems to me that if we're going to have a draft and i really believe that if we did have a draft set up that congress would not be so anxious to the democrats and republicans to put our young people in harm's way. >> tell me why you say that because you're introduced this legislation multiple times and it's clearly something you're very committed to. you bet your life because the people in the congress that allow these things to go on, they have no fear that anyone in their community and their families are going to be making any sacrifice at all. less than 1% of americans, most of whom volunteer for economic reasons paid the price in terms of 6600 lives lost, tens of thousands of people wounded. veterans, american veterans coming home, disoriented, unemploy unemployed, some homeless and no one pays a price. i submit to you, we would not be in iraq, afgh
're going to cut pretty significantly from the pentagon's budget. your move, mr. president. >> he wants revenues to go up again and john boehner's response is, we just did that. >> that's the thing. we always heard, you guys raise taxes, cut defense spending and then we will come back with a compromise on spending cuts. but, no, we raise taxes, we come forward with pentagon cuts and the president comes back with, we want to tax more americans. let's raise taxes again. >> you wonder where this ends now then, right, because if the president's not going to go anywhere without more revenue, where does this take us? we have the plan in place that was supposed to do both of those things. we're at that point on friday and we will hit it and neither side is going to get to it. what's the end game here. >> how do you think this is goin going? >> it's going terribly. >> republicans always lose these budget battles. i get a sense for the first time the president is overplaying his hand. talking about fear and loathing, locusts ascending from the heavens, now talking about more tax cuts, your dog w
there starts to end. the headline news out of brussels today was a very terse statement from the pentagon spokesman. it was kind of strange. he was essentially clarifying, hey, whatever you heard from the germans earlier today, that was not true. this is the statement. the reports that the u.s. told allies that we are considering 8,000 to 12,000 u.s. troops after 2014 are not correct. a range of 8,000 to 12,000 troops was discussed, but it was discussed as the possible size of the overall nato mission, not the u.s. contribution. ah, important clarification. so the defense minister from germany had apparently told reporters that 8 to 12,000 troops was how many troops america was going to keep in afghanistan. everybody thought that was very big news since that's not what we heard hear at home at all. maybe that is how the german guy understood it, but it is apparently not the way that leon panetta meant it. that was the headline out of brussels today. those troops, that's nato combined, that's not just us. that was the headline. the other news of course was that representing the united stat
on the defense department, on the pentagon, and so these contractors have a lot to say about the overall size of our economy. the president having seen that is going to say look. we have these cuts that we agreed to go into place, but the economy can't handle it right now, so let's kick the can a little bit and do some of these same kinds of cuts, and they call them cuts, but they're not really cuts. sometimes they're reductions to future increases, sometimes they're taking into account things like not fighting in the iraq war any more, and accounting gimmickry to get to the next thing, and then we'll fall off that cliff when we get to it. >> we understand the president is going to highlight some bad things that will happen if this doesn't get resolved, things like kids getting kicked out of head start, people getting laid off from their jobs, cutting things like food safety inspectors so it won't be safe to eat. how much of that do you think the white house will talk about today because it sounds like it will go hand in hand that this is the house g.o.p.'s fault, you know, the house g.o.p. s
department after getting in a little bit of hot water after saying the pentagon was treating manning unfairly. three years later, what are your thoughts on him now? >> for a caveat, the formal trial has not begun, but there is a legal proceeding under way, you know, regarding the charges and a potential, you know, plea-bargain. so this is a very open and transparent legal process, so it's not as if he's being held without charge. that said, obviously, two years ago i was concerned that it was punitive confinement at quantico. eventually the army moved him to ft. leavenworth, and he received more suitable pretrial confinement which is consistent with, you know, our norps both in the military and civilian justice system. he stands accused of very serious crimes, and the legal case will get under way late they are spring. >> p.j. crowley, always a pleasure. thanks. >> all right, alex. >> still ahead, manti te'o meets the press. how did he handle the barrage of questions about that infamous hoax? ♪ [ male announcer ] were you more interesting in your twenties, or now? when you were starting out
the sequester in a hurry, then yes, it's a real problem because it doesn't let the pentagon begin to plan and distribute, if you will, the cuts. but at the end of the day, whether it's defense spending, education spending, health spending, what always matters more than how much you spend is how you spend it. and so i'm not, at the end of the day, all that worried about how much we spend, whether it's on defense or anything else. you just want to have the time to make some intelligent cuts rather than have to make them literally in a matter of days which would probably mean that readiness more than anything else would be cut out of the defense department account. and that's probably the one thing you don't want cut out of it. >> sam stein, you're close and yet so far away over there at the jump seat. what are the odds that the sequester actually takes place? we know the president's proposed something to push them back a while. are we going to see these kind of cuts, the ones that were outlined in the sequester proposal? >> i think the odds are pretty high, to be honest. i don't think there
Search Results 0 to 32 of about 33 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)